You can always find some limiting principal, but universities take $$ from Saudi sheiks--do they make the cut? Why?
-
-
There's a pretty clear limiting principle here, whether the person is in the White House.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AlexParkerDC @ryangrim
But that's a separate issue. In general, is it ok to take $$ from the Saudis? Ok to work with Stalin to beat Hitler?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Ok for Mandela to take $$ from Quadafi to defeat apartheid? It's not that easy to make these distinctions.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
The influence peddling/potential corruption issue is **different** than the moral clean source of the $$.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I don't see how that's true at all. The corruption/conflict issues, real or perceived, *are* the moral issue.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Ryan's point, I think, was to be skeptical that all of these donors were motivated by pure altruism.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AlexParkerDC @yeselson
exactly. And they're not stupid/in the business of wasting money.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ryangrim @AlexParkerDC
You have to measure that against: a) the good the $$ did, regardless of motivation; b) blocking influence seeking.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Look, Clintons should shut it down when she wins and stop contributions now. But that doesn't mean the $$ didn't do
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
why if she wins but not as SoS?
-
-
Replying to @ryangrim @AlexParkerDC
Well, too late--but, sure, that should have happened too.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
They were supposed to stop foreign donations from '09-'12.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.